>> if the last few days teach us anything, let it be this. that this work and the men and women who risked their lives to do it are at the heart of what makes america great and good. >> four americans, four patriots, they loved this country. and they chose to serve it and served it well. they had a mission, and they believed in it. they knew the danger, and they accepted it. they didn't simply embrace the american ideal. they lived it. they embodied it. ♪ -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com

this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you around the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we have at important story for you today. start with the proet -- protests. we'll talk to paul wolfowitz and others. next up, michael lewis spent eight months in the white house with unprecedented access to president obama. we'll talk about who obama is and how he makes decisions. also, why is israel trying to get the united states to commit to waging war when israel itself isn't willing to do so. and finally we'll take a look at these pictures. do you think they were taken by nasa or the european space agency? no, a teenager with a second-hand camera. but first here's my take. the images of the american embassy burning in benghazi might have conjured up memories of tehran in 1979, but the analogy is false.

in libya, the government is not fomenting anti-americanism. it is fighting it, openly declaring america an ally and friend. libya is pro-american by two to one. the violence there appears to have been the work of small extremist elements that lack much popular support. but the storm has spread from libya. across the middle east there have been protests rallying against the united states and the west in general. even in these places, however, keep in mind that these crowds number in the hundreds, perhaps thousands. in countries with tens of millions of people. they make for vivid images, but they don't tell the whole story. what can we say about these places and protests? first in many of these countries, particularly those that have toppled dictatorships, the most important reality is not of bad government but of weak government. in libya, yemen, and even egypt, the state has lost its ability to control its public.

in a sense, this might be progress. egypt didn't see protests like this before because mubarak's regime would arrest, even shoot protesters. the current egyptian president is an elected politician and is he is trying to pander, appease, direct, and guide his people. i wish he were bolder and fought the extremist elements in his society head on, but let's face it. he's behaving like an elect politician. second, what we are witnessing is indeed the consequence of the arab spring. arab societies were locked down for 50 years. the lid has come off them, and what we' seeing inside has some good elements, moderates, liberals, pragmatists, and some very nasty elements, extremists, islamic fundamentalists, jihadees. let us be honest. there is a cancer of extremism in the arab world, one that was diagnosed extensively after 9/11 by many including me.

that cancer has not been cured. most of the forces that produced it still remain. we should be honest that it exists, we should be honest that moderates in the region tend to be weak, often cowardly, but we should try to help them. if the united states pulls out, the crazies only get stronger. the clash of civilizations exists, and it is within islam between those who want to burn american embassies and those who want to partner with us in building modern societies. we have a stake in who wins that struggle. let's get started. joining me now, the man who was national security adviser in 1979 when the u.s. embassy was taken over, zbigniew brzezinski. president carter's national

security adviser. welcome, zbigniew. >> welcome. good to see you. >> do you worry about some dramatic event like in the late 1970s taking place across the world? >> not really. i think the situation today is much more complex than then. at the time the muslim states in the area were relatively conservative, politically controlled, internally stable, with the exception of iran, which eventually disintegrated. but we didn't respond by plunging the region into a war and i think we have to thing of that very hard these days because the entire region is very volatile. tremendous emotions have been unleashed. and i think if we act unwisely or if for that matter israel acts unwisely, we can plunge the entire region, put it on fire and create international consequences that will be

menacing to everyone. >> do you think there is danger will become a kind of snowballing, kind of cascade or as i say is it possibly going to peter out? >> well, it might peter out if nothing else happens and if no really incendiary acts are undertaken. but, you know, its's very hard to predict now because the situation is so volatile. who can predict what kind of violence might erupt here or there and with what consequences. my point is that to extend the irrational players involved -- and i consider the united states to be an irrational player -- still, i think we ought to exercise maximum caution and try to dampen the emotions, provide security to those who are worried about their security, but not engage in actions that are like putting a match to a canister full of gasoline. >> do you think it would be wise to in some way condition egyptian aid on the president

being willing to take harder line on the extremists within his country? >> i think it's purposeful to condition our aid to anyone in the middle east on them being receptive, also to our interest and views in the region. i think that is the only way to conduct foreign policy. so i approve the message the president has just sent to egypt. >> do these recent protests make you reconsider the arab spring and make you wonder whether the arab spring has gone bad? >> well, fareed, when the arab spring was being hailed by everyone here as democracy, i was, i think, one of the very few people, maybe you were one of them, too, who publicly warned that we should not confuse populism with democracy. populism is the first phase of the political awakening of the masses but that isn't necessarily a commitment to democracy.

were making all sorts of loose comparisons with the spring in europe in 1989, solidarity and democracy and all of that, and i pointed out that those movements in central europe were like the spring of nations in 1848. there was a legitimate and real commitment to democracy on the part of the movement and of their leaders. that is not the case in the middle east. populism is still very, very young, immature, not really connected with constitutional traditions, recognition of t rule of law, and is being driven and this is very important by an increasingly radicalized historical narrative in which the era of imperialism is

becoming more and more associated with us. not just with the british and the french, but with us. >> zbigniew brzezinski, always a pleasure to have you on. >> it's a pleasure but a tough situation these days. i value your program. >> thank you, sir. we're going to be back with more on this. paul wolfowitz, bernard-henri levy, and tariq ramadan when we come back. it's proven to be 4x better at smoothing lines and deep wrinkles than professional treatments. roc® max for maximum results.

♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i can go anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la la la la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. solutionism. the new optimism. how did the nba become the hottest league on the planet? by building on the cisco intelligent network they're able to serve up live video, and instant replays, creating fans from berlin to beijing. what can we help you build? nice shot kid. the nba around the world built by the only company that could. cisco.

let's turn now to bernard-henri levy, the french philosopher who was instrumental in getting the world to

intervene in libya march of last year. he spent a lot of time in benghazi and was a friend of chris stevens. paul wolfowitz was the secretary of defense under president george w. bush and president of the world bank. and the author of islam and the arab awakening, ram dan's grandfather was the founder of the muslim brotherhood. bernard, tell us what you can tell us about libya. does this -- does this -- do these events mean that libya has gone seriously awry? >> i would like first of all, fareed, to tell you what i know and what i remember about ambassador stevens. he was a great guy, a great fellow, a great ambassador, and a great american. he was the embodiment of the values of the best of america, and his death is a terrible loss for all of us and a loss for libya, and a loss for libya.

what the imbeciles who killed him probably did not know is he was one of the best friends libya all around the world. if the dictatorship of gadhafi failed it is due in a big part to ambassador chris stevens and i want to pay him homage today before anything else. >> but what does it tell you about libya? have the extremist elements become so strong in that country? what it tells me about libya is what, of course, we all knew. there is a political fight side libya between democrats and between fanatics, between those who believe in the process, which was -- which began with the fall of gadhafi, and those who want to stop the process. the guys who are still the minority in libya, who did that,

this terrible criminal act, they want to freeze the arab spring. so the question today is should we help them to switch off the flame of democracy or should we continue to believe in the flame of democracy. i believe the second. i believe that we have more than evolved to help those who are -- after ambassador stevens the victims of these stupid criminal guys who are the democrats in libya. >> paul wolfowitz, you have been consistently in favor of democracy and openness in the arab world. you have criticized arab dictatorships. many people think you were one of the brains if not the brain behind george w. bush's freedom agenda. many conservatives, many of your fellow conservatives were and are very critical and really believe that the arab spring has

been a terrible thing for the united states, for our interests, for israel. how do you look at what has just happened? >> fareed, i think, first of all, i've said many times the arab spring could easily be followed by an arab winter and the seasonal terms don't help much. it's a massive upheaval. it's not something a product of what george bush did. it's the products of depression and repression by these dictatorships that didn't even allow the modicum of civil society to develop as it did develop for example, in indonesia or morocco. that's the key ingredient here. but to turn to libya, what i think we're seeing there and the only thing i would absolutely agree with what bernard-henri levy said about chris stevens, he was a fantastic man who really was advancing american interests and libyan interests and his death is an enormous loss. i disagree, the people that killed him weren't i am best i wills, they were doing it

precisely to damage libya. we don't know who is behind it, but i think it's clear this is some combination of forces that want to disrupt the progress libya has made. your viewers should understand because very few americans do, that in the elections in july, the muslim brotherhood came in a distant second and the salafis who are responsible for much of this violence didn't even show. they were anyone to destroy mosques, which were part of the security forces. so part of what we're seeing in libya, i believe, is the failure of the west having done half the right thing, the failure of the united states and france and great britain, to equip the new libyan security forces and instead we left that to countries like qatar, and that's part of the result we're seeing, incompetent and deceitful, disgracefully deceitful security forces in libya. >> but, paul, what do you say to people who look at these protests and look at the egyptian president waffling and

say, look, you know, what we've unleashed here is a kind of tidal wave of anti-americanism. >> we didn't unleash it. again, it was a pot that was going to burst. i believe that what you said earlier is also true. this isn't the muslim world against the west. this is a fight within the muslim world, and u.s. also is absolutely right that it's very much in our interest to help those who believe in a modern islam and modernity for muslims to win in this fight. i think we should have been absolutely clear from the beginning. the president of the united states should have said it's unacceptable the way the egyptian security forces allowed that embassy to be attacked. they hadn't at that point condemned the protest or destruction of the embassy in egypt. we should make very clear what behavior we expect from these new governments whether they're democratically elected or not, there will be consequences if

they don't live up to standards that are important to us. >> tariq ramadan, when you look at the muslim brotherhood in power, these are when the protest movements have been given responsibility to run and modern iez their societies. the first tests, they seem to be coming out not so well in egypt, wouldn't you agree? >> we should see quite clearly that the great majority of the libyans and egyptians and yemeni and tunesia people are completely against what was done against the embassies, the killing of the ambassador. this isn't acceptable, it is anti-islamic and the majority of them don't follow the tiny minority of people who exactly -- and this is right -- they exactly won this. they want the clash. they want the west and getting

religious credibility by being against the west. now, what is happening in egypt is a struggle for the religious credibility. so the muslim brotherhood are in charge and it's true that the rst thing that should have been said is it's unacceptable and unjustifiable to attack an embassy and to kill people. this is not acceptable. this is not the right answer. even though at the same time, it's legitimate for the people to say that the people who are behind the movie and what they are trying to do, the populists on both sides are dangerous, and we have to be clear, freedom of expression should be protected everywhere, but we can't use freedom of expression to promote racism or bigotry and hatred. >> but, tariq, let me ask you about this struggle. when you see this struggle in the muslim world, and you're probably right, this is a tiny minority that are causing the extremism, somehow the majority, the moderates cower in fear. they don't come out and openly denounce it.

they fear that they will be regarded as bad muslims. why is it so difficult for moderates in the muslim world, particularly the arab world, to denounce this kind of violence in the name of islam? >> because there is a double struggle. and you are right. we need to have intellectuals and scholars being clear on the in fact this is not only not islamic, it's anti-islamic, and we don't accept that and we have to stand up for some principles and say no to this kind of behavior. at the end of the day, some muslims are doing things that are not acceptable, stand up and say it and have the courage to face your own society and at the same time to be critical toward the american policy because this is legitimate to be critical. and they there are issues to be critical about as to what is done in the middle east. >> bernard-henri levy,o you think this makes it less

hopeful for the future of libya and other arab countries? >> like i said before, i believe it is a wrong path. he said that it should not be compared with what happens in eastern europe. yes and no. in eastern europe we had the democratic spring 20 years after 25 years after. look at what happens in hungary, for example. budapest. so spring, winter, spring again, it's a long process. french revolution, you know the story as well as me. it was, again, a long process. democracy takes time. and another thing, what we see today is a result of 42 years in the case of libya, more in the case of egypt, of dictatorship,

of democratic coma. sort of mental coma. how can we hope freedom to come completely perfectly armed out of the nest after such a long time of darkness. >> bernard-henri levy, tariq ramadan, and paul wolfowitz, thank you very much. up next, what is ahead on auto pilot in iran. we'll explore. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about the cookie-cutter retirement advice ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you get at some places. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 they say you have to do this, have that, invest here ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you know what? ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you can't create a retirement plan based on ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 a predetermined script. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 to understand you and your goals... ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ...so together we can find real-life answers for your ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 real-life retirement. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 talk to chuck ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 and let's write a script based on your life story. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550

[ sneezes ] [ male announcer ] if you have yet to master the quiet sneeze... ♪ [ sneezes ] [ male announcer ] you may be an allergy muddler. try zyrtec®. it gives you powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because zyrtec® starts working at hour 1 on the first day you take it. claritin® doesn't start working until hour 3. [ sneezes ] [ male announcer ] zyrtec®. love the air. join zyrtec® rewards. save up to $7 on zyrtec® products. join z♪rtec® rewards. ♪ ♪ ♪ there's another way to help erase litter box odor. purina tidy cats. only tidy cats has odor erasers. making it easy to keep things at home... just the way you want them. tidy cats with odor erasers.

now for our "what in the world" segment. there are growing signs coming out of israel that we're moving toward another war in the mid east. listen to how benjamin netanyahu tells it. >> the world tells israel wait. there's still time. and i say wait for what? wait until when? those in the international community who refuse to put red

lines before iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before israel. >> last month an israeli decision maker widely reported to be a defense minister gave a revealing interview in which he implied that israel could not wait for the united states to act and might not be able to wait until next spring before taking matters into its own hands. >> thank you so much. >> the decision maker made the point that israel might find itself more hamstrung if mitt romney were elected in november. history shows presidents do not undertake dramatic operations in their first year of office unless forced to, he said. unless something dramatic changes its course, israel seems on a path to strike iran's nuclear facilities in the next six to nine months. the obama administration has brought together a global coalition, put into place the

toughest sanctions ever, worked with israel on a serious of covert programs and given israel military hardware it has long wanted. they have strongly implied it would be willing to use force as a final resort, but to go further and define a red line in advance would commit the united states to a certain path to war. notice that while netanyahu assails the international community by which he really means president obama for refusing to draw a clear line, he himself hasn't done so. israel has not specified an activity or enrichment level it would consider a threshold for war. the reason is obvious. doing so would restrict israel's options and signal its actions and timetable to iran. so if it doesn't make sense for israel to do this, why would it make sense for the united states? many israelis in the military

establishment understand an israeli strike would delay, not destroy iran's program. the program could with rebuilt probably quickly and with greater determination. this gentleman is one among several scholars who has documented how contrary to it that israel's 1981 attack on a reactor actually accelerated saddam hussein's determination to build nuclear weapons. >> this is the largest of the buildings. >> remember, when u.n. inspectors went into iraq after the persian gulf war in 1991, they were stunned at how quickly and secretly hussein had rebuilt his program. the obama administration is trying to assure israel that israel does not need to act, but in doing so, it will have to be careful not to lock itself onto a path that makes american military action inevitable. we should have a national debate before the united states of america finds itself going to war in the middle east again on auto pilot. for more on this, read my piece in "the washington post." we have a link on our website,

cnn.com/fareed. we'll be right back. up next, michael lewis, he's had unprecedented access to president obama this summer. what did he learn. stay with us.  xñ

michael lewis broet liar's poker and the oakland a's money ball. this time he entered a rarified world, flying on air force one, in the oval office, getting a tour of the private residence, playing basketball with the president of the united states. the result published in vanity fair is a unique, fascinating account of the day-to-day life of a sitting president. thanks for joining me, michael. >> good to see you again. >> so tell me, first of all you wrote this article while you had this mug with you, correct? >> i did. i had the gps official mug i stole the last time i was on my show on my desk and drank my coffee out of it. when whenever i feel kind of global or important i use your mug. >> i've got to tell you, it worked.

>> did it? >> first tell me about basketball. what did you learn in playing basketball with the president? the moment i liked is when you realized that he was ordering up his mouth guard. >> yes. so the general idea is i want to get to know this guy and the office and the best way to do it is just do things with him and i asked to play in basketball game. he did not tell me what the basketball game was like. the first hint of it was like when we were meeting in the white house in the morning you can drive over to the court and he's screaming to the doctor who follows him everywhere he goes, where's my mouth guard. i say, what do you need a mouth guard for? he showed me the teeth that got knocked out in previous games and the 14 stitches on his lip. i said, oh, my god, what kind of basketball is this. he said, you'll see. we get to the court. it looks like a really good college basketball game. all of these guys he plays with are former college players, big time, some of them play pro. >> 20 years younger than him. >> most of them. arne duncan played.

he's not 20 years younger but he was captain of the harvard basketball team. i was so out of my depth. i assumed he would be too. he not only plays in it, he can function in it. may be the weakest player on the court, but he's close. really can function in it. what it tells you -- what the game told me about him, couple things, one was nobody defers to him. he refuses to let that happen. so he gets abused just as much as he should be abused given his ability levels. he'll be wide open for a shot but he won't get the ball because somebody else is a better shooter. you wouldn't know he's the president watching the game. that tell use the kind of person he is. even if we're obviously not equal, he wants to feel like it's a relationship of equal, and -- >> is he very competitive? >> that's the other thing.

it's not a game. i mean it is game, it's fun, but it's game -- he really cares who wins, and so the first thing -- the first thing he said to me after he saw me, he said, we'll just sit you for a while until we get a lead and he benched me. i kind of was joking. i was coming to play basketball with you and you're going to bench me? and he benched me. he benched me because he didn't want to lose. he put me on his team and he didn't want to lose. so he was -- yes. i think i must have gotten a little passive aggressive about it. i was a little ticked off. one, that i wasn't warned, and, two, that i got benched when i got in, i jacked up shots. he started screaming at me. don't throw up shots without playing defense. get back and play defense. in the end, the president's team won these games. if a sports analyst was watching the game he would say the president was a little less talented but the president's

team won because they didn't take as many stupid shots and the reason was that if you took a stupid shot on the president's team, the president of the united states screamed at you. >> but that's revealing, right? he's not a guy who tries a lot of hail mary passes. he wants you to play kind of a conservative game that doesn't play too many risks. >> he plays -- it's an efficiency game. he plays a very efficient game. he moves. spaces the court very well. we played six games. he took five shots in six games which for me is not that fun. if i was president i want to be jacking it up. he made all but one of the shots because they were all -- it was precisely calculated. i saw that. i watched him do a number of things. i thought he'd be an excellent sniper in the army. he sort of looks for his moment and then when he has his moment, he pulls the trigger. >> it's like a poker player who gets out of the game unless he has the cards. >> that's right. he'd ante, ante, ante, fold,

fold, fold. then that's exactly how we'd play poker. >> interesting. i was struck by something else, he shows you his private office, that little cubbyhole and there are a lot of books in it. but we know he's a reading president. there's a novel on top by julian barnes. we know from a couple other things, do you think he must be the most writerly person to become president in a long time. it's not about reading because a lot of people read. he has time to read novels. >> he's writing too. i think he's as literary a president than anybody we ever had, probably since lincoln anyway in that he lives -- the written word means a lot to him, and you know, this isn't in the piece, but i can remember talking to him about this a bit.

he was an indifferent student in high school up to toward the end and he had a very late wakening in my mind. i can kind of identify with this because i was with a late bloomer in high school and i have the same experience with books. he said he was like passing by a church yard sale in hawaii when he was a junior in high school and he saw all these novels. they were available for a nickel apiece. he thought, a nickel? you know, i'll get these books. he started reading them and in an innocent way he got very absorbed. he kind of blended with the books. when he got out of school, the first thing he started to do is write short stories. i don't know if anybody knows that. i didn't put this in the piece, but he tried to submit short stories to literary magazines and they're very literary short stories so it's an unusual trait in someone who ends up being a political person. that's right. >> all right. we'll be back with more with michael lewis talking about barack obama. [ female announcer ] they can be enlightening.

hey, bro. or engaging. conversations help us learn and grow. at wells fargo, we believe you can never undestimate the power of a conversation. it's this exchange of ideas that helps you move ahead with confidence. so when the conversation turns to your financial goals... turn to us. if you need anything else, let me know. [ female announcer ] wells fargo.

tether we'll go far. trick question. i love everything about this country! including prilosec otc. you know one pill each morning treats your frequent heartburn so you can enjoy all this great land of ours has to offer like demolition derbies. and drive thru weddings. so if you're one of those people who gets heartburn and then treats day after day, block the acid with prilosec otc and don't get heartburn in the first place. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn.

and we are back with michael lewis, the author of a great new "vanity fair" piece on president obama.

so let's talk about obama as president. we talked about him really as a man. how does he make decisions? you, which struck me was, you'll notice i only wear blue and gray suits. >> yes, because he -- because -- and his point was that the simple act of making a decision degrades your ability to make future decisions. anybody who's gone -- or wandered into a costco without knowing exactly what they wanted, you come out kind of shattered. you're exhausted and you wonder why you're tired. it's because you made all these trivial decisions. so he's constructed his environmental to minimize the number of trivial decisions he has to make like what he wears, so he got rid of all his suits except the blue or gray suits. he doesn't think about what he's going to eat. it's decided for him. the structure of his day is largely decided in advance. so he takes that all off the table so the energy is there for the big decisions. >> and what is the nature of the decision-making?

would you describe it as kind of gut, analytic, calculating? how does he make decisions? >> this is a really good question. not to flatter you, but he -- it is -- it's some -- it's a come -- curious combination because he's by nature a very "moneyball" kind of guy, very analytical. he's very aware when he goes into a room full of advisers, what their biases might be, how they're putting their finger on the scale, very interested in -- i'll tell you what he is. he thinks probabilistically. very aware that whatever choice he makes, there's a 45% chance it's going to be wrong, that they are inherently, inherently uncertain matters and he's going to have to pretend to be certain about inherently

uncertain things. he's thinking probabilistically. when you pull the trigger as the sniper, in the end it's a gut call. it's not a science. it's never a science. you never know if you know the true probabilities. so he has great faith in his instincts, great faith in his instincts, extremely self-confident. a virtue, he has confidence. it's what -- you see it in little things he does. so in the last campaign, someone tossed him a basketball and the cameras were on him and he could have just tossed it back. instead he turns and takes a three-point shot. it was nothing but net but that's someone who's confident, he bowls, right? he was terrible, but he had the confidence to do it. so he's not afraid. so there's some, at some point the analytics and the dry clear

thinking ends and he says, and he has a feel. >> there's one piece, a part where he says something to you which strikes me as a tough thing for a president where he says i can't fake emotion, i don't like doing it. but the president is often placed in situations where you assume he has to, you know, as people used to always say about bill clinton, he has to show that he cares. >> right. i think obama has decided that he's just a very bad actor, that there's no point in even trying to fake what he doesn't feel. he feels a lot of emotion, but he can't fake it. so anger. a lot of people wanted him to show a lot more anger than he has and this is how we stumbled into this topic. he says, i just -- you know, it's pointless. it's foolish, you know. there's -- not only am i bad at faking the emotion, but there's a cost because there is a strength in authenticity. if i actually only express what i feel, there will be some benefit to that. i lose that for nothing if i went about trying to fake these emotions that people seem to want me to exhibit.

>> he doesn't schmooze john boehner, he doesn't pal around with congress, which is, you know, partly a kind of faking it. >> right. >> do you see that? >> yeah. i tell you what i see, and this. this is -- it's a personality trait, but it's a pretty natural one. it's not a grotesque one, but it is noticeable. he's very serious about the trans for appalachiformation of transactional relationship and a non-transactional relationship. they didn't want anything from me, i didn't want anything from him, we just liked each other. he definitely puts that in a different category from transactional relationships. he himself is not needy. he doesn't need you to say nice things about him. he doesn't care. so i think it doesn't occur to him that you might need him to

say nice things about you. the interaction i had with him, if you backed away from it, this is very strange. i have met a lot of politicians, i've written about politicians, and in variably, the first thing they say to me is, i love your writing. you are a genius. they want to have that interaction, so we are loving each other. and very on whiften i can tell haven't read a word of what i've written. so this president let me in, but not once does he indicate he knows him an author. >> he never said, i read such and such? >> i happen to know he did read a book or two i've written, but he never offered that. ere was never an attempt to flatter me. i thought, that's pretty extraordinary. i doubt i would have been there if he didn't like what i wrote.

he doesn't go there quickly, so that's very noticeable. that's why in real life it's a delightful quality. he's not funny, right, but in washington culture, there's no question it's a culture of flattery. >> michael lewis, it's a pleasure as always. >> good to see you. up next, how much does it cost to get to outer space? how about if i told you $320 would do the trick? i'll give you details after this. [ owner ] i need to expand

to meet the needs of my growing business. but how am i going to fund it? and i have to find a way to manage my cash flow better. [ female announcer ] our wells fargo bankers are here to listen, offer guidance and provide you with options tailored to your business. we've loaned more money to small businesses than any other bank for ten years running. so come talk to us to see how we can help. wells fargo. together we'll go far. his morning starts with arthritis pain. and two pills. afternoon's overhaul starts with more pain. more pills.

triple checking hydraulics. the evening brings more pain. so, back to more pills. almost done, when... hang on. stan's doctor recommended aleve. it can keep pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is rudy. who switched to aleve. and two pills for a day free of pain. ♪ and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels.

the killing of ambassador chris stevens in benghazi this week took me back to when such a sad thing took place.

1979 was the year the last u.s. ambassador was killed in an attack. what was the country it happened in? is it a, egypt, b, iran, c, iraq or d, afghanistan? we'll tell you the correct answer in just a moment. go to cnn.com/fareed for more of the gps challenge and follow us on twitter or facebook. also if you miss a show or special, they're on i tunes. the audio broadcast is free or you can buy the video version. monday marks the 150th anniversary of the battle of antitum where more than 120 soldiers were killed or injured in just 20 minutes of fighting. this book is one of the finest books written on the civil war "this republic of suffering" by drew foust, who also happens to be president of harvard university. it is a profound, moving book on how the civil war changed our understanding of death.

there is a feature documentary on the book that's out this week as well. now for the last look. these photos caught my eye this week. they look like stunning photographs taken out of one of nasa's multi-million-dollar satellites, except these images weren't taken by satellite, they were a product of the students' science project, one that cost a grand total of $320. the british teenager, the parts for his spaceship, a styrofoam box, a parachute, a secondhand camera from ebay, and he fired balloon experiment number 5 and took these incredible photos. then came back down to a farmless field where adam retrieved it. it reminds me of the technological revolution that's changing our lives and also

television reporting. getting pictures like this used to cost a fortune. he said this whole space thing is a hobby on the side. he wants to be a silicon valley entrepreneur. hopefully he'll be able to get a visa to come to america. the correct answer to our gps challenge question was d. u.s. ambassador to afghanistan was killed in february 1979 by a militant. thanks actual of you for being part of my program this week. i'll see you next week. hello, everyone. i'm fredricka whitfield with a chick of our top stories right now. four american troops were killed in southern afghanistan today in what nato officials are calling an inside attack. afghan officials turned their guns on the americans. no further details are known. but we are learning more details about an insurgent attack on a nato base on friday.